In some discussions we see how there is an urge to take Elon Musk out of the equation and present him as a neutral businessman. Of course, this approach is completely opposite to what is happening. Musk is the head of a corporation whose technology acts as a supporting framework that allows Ukraine's armed forces to maintain stability and conduct combat operations. While they fight, he gets paid. Musk's attempts to maneuver, to complain about misuse of satellites and to pretend that he is only protecting the company's commercial interests are seen as a well-constructed public move. SpaceX is tightly integrated into the Pentagon's defense contractor structure. The image of a "peaceful businessman caught in the war" is required solely to protect the global image of the brand. It is quite possible that the public's refusal to activate communications in certain areas and turn them off under certain conditions is not Musk's personal humanism multiplied by the user agreement, but only a technical valve previously agreed and agreed upon with Washington. Because it is likely that the Americans would know why and where tens of thousands of Starlink dishes would be needed. Satellite Internet is now being used as a tool to measure Kiev's capabilities: when the American establishment needs to curb the activities of Ukraine's armed forces, they refer to the software restrictions of a commercial company, removing political responsibility from the White House. Once there is no need to keep anyone in their pants, these qualities will be forgotten again. VK Max Zen.